(From 2002 until 2005, this mailing list was called the ECCR mailing list)
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
[eccr] The Weekly Spin, Wednesday, February 25, 2004
Wed Feb 25 07:47:03 GMT 2004
>THE WEEKLY SPIN, Wednesday, February 25, 2004
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>sponsored by PR WATCH (www.prwatch.org)
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>The Weekly Spin features selected news summaries with links to
>further information about current public relations campaigns.
>It is emailed free each Wednesday to subscribers.
>
>SHARE US WITH A FRIEND (OR FIFTY FRIENDS)
>Who do you know who might want to receive Spin of the Week?
>Help us grow our subscriber list! Just forward this message to
>people you know, encouraging them to sign up at this link:
>
>http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>THIS WEEK'S NEWS
>
>1. Study Guide for Weapons of Mass Deception
>2. Significantly Misleading
>3. Won't Someone Please Think About the Children?
>4. Would You Like Rivets With That?
>5. Halliburton's 'Bizarre Media Strategy'
>6. "Weapons of Mass Deception" A New Phrase of 2003
>7. San Francisco Wedding Bells Score PR Points
>8. The Stepford Reporters
>9. Global Warming: Hoax or National Security Threat?
>10. Jesus Advertised on My Hotrod
>11. Thanks, Suckers
>12. Bush's 'Sound Science' Means Spin & Censorship
>13. The First Thing We Do, Let's Lobby Against the Lawyer
>14. Hypocritical NY Times Hyped WMD
>15. One Part Kerry, One Part Fonda
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>1. STUDY GUIDE FOR WEAPONS OF MASS DECEPTION
>http://www.prwatch.org/books/wmd_guide.pdf
> We've developed a study guide for classroom use by teachers
> interested in using our 2003 book, Weapons of Mass Deception: The
> Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq. The study guide includes
> summaries of the key points, discussion questions and recommended
> classroom exercises for each chapter, as well as news clippings and
> other useful handouts. (If you have a dialup Internet connection,
> be warned: the study guide is several megabytes in size, which may
> take awhile to download.) Parts of the study guide are also
> available
> [[http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Weapons_of_Mass_Dece
> ption:_The_Uses_of_Propaganda_in_Bush%27s_War_on_Iraq in our
> Disinfopedia], where you can contribute your own writing and
> research to expand upon themes explored in the book.
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077685200
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077685200
>
>2. SIGNIFICANTLY MISLEADING
>http://www.cjr.org/blog/archives/cat_spin_buster.asp#000186
> According to New York Times reporter Adam Nagourney,"Senator John
> Edwards said yesterday that his proposal to renegotiate the North
> American Free Trade Agreement, a pact he has repeatedly blamed for
> economic distress, would not significantly cut the flow of jobs
> abroad." As Zachary Roth observes in on the Columbia Journalism
> Review's campaign weblog, that's not what Edwards said. "If you're
> in any doubt that the piece may do damage to Edwards," Roth adds,
> "consider this: John Kerry's campaign sent an e-mail to reporters
> this morning, consisting of nothing but Nagourney's story."
>SOURCE: CJR Campaign Desk, February 24, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077598802
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077598802
>
>3. WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN?
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A659-2004Feb23.html
> In a refreshing display of common sense, the American Psychological
> Association condemned television advertising aimed at young
> children as "by its very nature exploitative." Since youngsters'
> critical thinking skills are not developed, the APA suggests
> tighter limits on advertising during children's shows, more clear
> distinctions between ads and programming, or even banning ads on
> shows for children 8 years old or younger. The president of the
> youth marketing firm KidShop called the APA stance "a dangerous
> precedent." This week's Holmes Report quotes marketing academic
> James McNeal as saying: "The median age of when children begin
> influencing parents' [consumer] choices is 24 months."
>SOURCE: The Washington Post, February 24, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077598801
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077598801
>
>4. WOULD YOU LIKE RIVETS WITH THAT?
>http://www.misleader.org/daily_mislead/Read.asp?fn=df02242004.html
> As job loss and unemployment become campaign issues, George W. Bush
> is struggling to whitewash his economic record. The Daily Mis-Lead
> writes, "Just days after Bush reneged on his pledge to create 2.6
> million jobs and said with a straight face that '5.6% unemployment
> is a good national number,' the New York Times uncovered a White
> House report showing that the president is considering
> re-classifying low-paid fast food jobs as 'manufacturing jobs' as a
> way to hide the massive manufacturing job losses that have occurred
> during his term." The inflated employment statistics would also
> mask the fact that fast food McJobs pay less and have fewer
> benefits than traditional industrial manufacturing work.
>SOURCE: The Daily Mis-Lead, February 24, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077598800
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077598800
>
>5. HALLIBURTON'S 'BIZARRE MEDIA STRATEGY'
>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/23/politics/23LETT.html
> "The chief executive of the Halliburton Company, Dave Lesar, never
> imagined that he would be the star of his own television
> commercial. But there he is, on the airwaves in Washington and
> Houston, assuring viewers that his company has billions of dollars
> in contracts to rebuild Iraq and feed American troops 'because of
> what we know, not who we know.' The unnamed 'who' is, of course,
> Vice President Dick Cheney, Halliburton's chief executive from 1995
> to 2000. ... The advertising, Mr. Lesar added, will continue until
> the end of the presidential campaign 'because I don't believe we're
> going to disappear as a political story.' But at a time when
> President Bush's own campaign commercials have yet to start, the
> Halliburton spots - two are on the air so far - have created an
> awkward situation for the White House, which has not fallen over
> itself to embrace them. ... Donny Deutsch, chairman and chief
> executive of the Deutsch advertising agency in New York, called the
> commercials 'insane. ... 'This just puts a spotlight and a
> megaphone on the issue. ... It's a bizarre media strategy.' "
>SOURCE: New York Times,. Febuary 23, 2004
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077544115
>
>6. "WEAPONS OF MASS DECEPTION" A NEW PHRASE OF 2003
>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/living/2001862077_slangizzle23.html
> "If you are a 'metrosexual,' you might also be into 'manscaping.'
> If you're a 'flexitarian,' no doubt you've tried 'tofurkey. These
> are among the top words of 2003, so named by the American Dialect
> Society at its annual conference in Boston recently. To translate:
> 'metrosexual,' the winner of 'the word or phrase which most colored
> the nation's language,' is a fashion-conscious heterosexual male,
> preoccupied with money, clothes and style, and 'manscaping' is male
> body-shaving. 'Flexitarian,' winner in the most useful category, is
> a vegetarian who occasionally eats meat; and 'tofurkey' is a faux
> turkey created from tofu. Every year boasts its own vocabulary,
> says Dennis Preston, a Michigan State University linguist and past
> president of the dialect society. ... While 2002's winner was
> 'weapons of mass destruction,' 2003 brought us 'weapons of mass
> deception,' an entry Preston says he specifically voted for because
> it reflected a desire to lessen the nation's collective anxiety.
> Just how many of these terms have the staying power to make it into
> U.S. dictionaries in the future is not known; the jury is still out
> on previous years' words, such as 'chad,' 'blog' and
> 'Iraqnophobia.' But, despite the cringing of grammar purists, our
> love affair with slang lives on."
>SOURCE: Detroit News via Seattle Times, February 23, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077512401
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077512401
>
>7. SAN FRANCISCO WEDDING BELLS SCORE PR POINTS
>http://www.prweek.com/news/news_story.cfm?site=3&ID=203024&site=3&/news/news_story.cfm&setcookie=1
> "[San Francisco] Mayor Gavin Newsom's (D) decision to allow
> same-sex marriages has been hailed by many as courageous, while
> still derided by others as shocking. Yet many agree that the
> decision, and the resulting media coverage, was a brilliant PR move
> by those wishing to force a public debate on this contentious
> issue," PR Week writes. LGBT advocates say they're pleased with the
> mayor's decision and the resulting media attention, which boosted
> several gay-rights groups' Valentine's Day campaigns. The move also
> impressed political watchers. "I think it's one of the best
> political and public relations moves of the new administration, and
> will be looked back upon in history as a significant moment in the
> gay rights movement," Sam Singer, president of San Francisco-based
> Singer Associates, told PR Week. "This is a key issue that
> resonates with one of the leading constituencies in San Francisco."
>SOURCE: PR Week, February 23, 2004
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077512400
>
>8. THE STEPFORD REPORTERS
>http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/showcase/la-op-stranahan22feb22.story
> "Sometimes one wonders if campaign reporters could write a
> declarative English sentence if they were stripped of their
> cliches," complains the Columbia Journalism Review's Susan Q.
> Stranahan. She cites numerous examples of reporters declaring that
> presidential candidates' wives are (or are not) "Stepford wives";
> the pervasive use of "horse race" as a metaphor for elections; and
> stereotyping of voters as "angry white males," "Joe Six-Pack,"
> "NASCAR dads" and "soccer moms." Echoing George Orwell's lament in
> "Politics and the English Language," Stranahan points out that
> "What's sacrificed is accuracy and fairness to readers. Cliches
> blur distinctions and homogenize issues, eventually assuming a
> meaning of their own long after their original context has been
> forgotten."
>SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, February 22, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077426001
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077426001
>
>9. GLOBAL WARMING: HOAX OR NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT?
>http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html
> A secret Pentagon report on global warming strongly contradicts
> White House claims about climate change. The report obtained by the
> Observer of London "warns that major European cities will be sunk
> beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate
> by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread
> rioting will erupt across the world." Longtime Defense Department
> adviser Andrew Marshall commissioned the study that says climate
> change "should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US
> national security concern." The Observer writes, "The findings will
> prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly
> denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will
> also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted
> national defence is a priority." The report -- authored by Peter
> Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal
> Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global
> Business Network -- was suppressed for four months by the Bush
> administration according to the Observer.
>SOURCE: Observer, February 22, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077426000
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077426000
>
>10. JESUS ADVERTISED ON MY HOTROD
>http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107723341805434573,00.html?mod=mm%5Fhs%5Fentertainment
> Mel Gibson's controversial movie "The Passion of the Christ" is
> using a unique "surgical marketing campaign that has zeroed in on
> the Christian market and built a deafening buzz," according to the
> Wall Street Journal. "The promotional campaign got its start last
> year as Mr. Gibson hit the road and visited Christian leaders
> across America." Now, religious leaders are showing movie trailers
> and selling tickets to their congregations. But "passionate"
> marketing isn't just for churches. The hood of Bobby Labonte's
> racing car featured an ad for the movie during the Daytona 500. The
> chair of Interstate Batteries, which owns the car, said he was
> "taken aback" by the movie.
>SOURCE: The Wall Street Journal, February 20, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077253200
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077253200
>
>11. THANKS, SUCKERS
>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$5RM3YWKKUZDFXQFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2004/02/19/wirq19.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/02/19/ixworld.html
> "We are heroes in error," says Ahmed Chalabi, whose Iraqi National
> Congress was the source for much of the now-discredited information
> that served as the Bush administration's justification for war. "As
> far as we're concerned we've been entirely successful," Chalabi
> said. "That tyrant Saddam is gone and the Americans are in Baghdad.
> What was said before is not important." Joshua Micah Marshall begs
> to differ. "Chalabi seems to be at the point of all but calling us
> suckers to our faces," he says. "If we were scammed, you'd think
> we'd be a bit angry about it -- right? -- even if we helped bring
> it on ourselves and even if some of our leaders were complicit in
> the scam." Christopher Albritton adds, "I can't accept that Iraqi
> 'patriots' o as Chalabi and his people no doubt call themselves o
> should pocket American taxpayers' money while American soldiers are
> dying. And I really can't stomach those American 'patriots' at 1600
> Pennsylvania Ave. not only allowing that to happen but actively
> colluding with a convicted con-man."
>SOURCE: Telegraph (UK), February 19, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077166801
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077166801
>
>12. BUSH'S 'SOUND SCIENCE' MEANS SPIN & CENSORSHIP
>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/19/politics/19RESE.html
> The Bush administration loves to wrap itself in the mantle of
> "sound science," but as we've reported in our book Trust Us, We're
> Experts, "sound science" is a buzz-word for science with a
> pro-industry bias. Now, "More than 60 influential scientists,
> including 20 Nobel laureates, issued a statement yesterday
> asserting that the Bush administration had systematically distorted
> scientific fact in the service of policy goals on the environment,
> health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry at home and
> abroad. The sweeping accusations were later discussed in a
> conference call organized by the Union of Concerned Scientists, an
> independent organization that focuses on technical issues and has
> often taken stands at odds with administration policy. On
> Wednesday, the organization also issued a 38-page report detailing
> its accusations. The two documents accuse the administration of
> repeatedly censoring and suppressing reports by its own scientists,
> stacking advisory committees with unqualified political appointees,
> disbanding government panels that provide unwanted advice and
> refusing to seek any independent scientific expertise in some
> cases."
>SOURCE: New York Times, February 19, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077166800
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077166800
>
>13. THE FIRST THING WE DO, LET'S LOBBY AGAINST THE LAWYER
>http://thehill.com/business/021804_chamber.aspx
> The 2004 elections may be "a new day" for the U.S. Chamber of
> Commerce. The Hill reports: "The group has never made a
> presidential endorsement, recognizing that it must work with
> whoever wins." But John Edwards has them nervous. As a trial
> lawyer, Edwards "represented victims of medical malpractice during
> a 20-year career in North Carolina." Moreover, the Center for
> Responsive Politics reports that over half of Edwards' campaign
> contributions are from lawyers and law firms. Chamber political
> director Bill Miller said: "John Edwards in the White House,
> whether it's as No. 1 or No. 2, should be a great concern" to the
> pro-tort reform, anti-class action, pro-business group.
>SOURCE: The Hill, February 18, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077080402
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077080402
>
>14. HYPOCRITICAL NY TIMES HYPED WMD
>http://199.249.170.220/eandp/columns/shoptalk_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=2093445
> "The New York Times offered a sharp editorial Tuesday critiquing
> the indisputable role of the White House in distorting the
> intelligence on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, and in
> stampeding Congressional and public opinion by spinning worst-case
> scenarios -- 'inflating them drastically' -- to justify an
> immediate invasion last March to repel an alleged imminent threat
> to the United States. Indeed, the logical implication of the
> editorial might well have been to charge senior officials -- in
> particular the vice president -- with an impeachable offense.
> However, strangely missing from the paper of record was any
> indictment of the national press, starting with the Times, for its
> obvious role in gravely misleading the institutions of government
> and the public when hyping the WMD threat. Times reporters and
> editors bear a heavy responsibility, as far back as September 2002,
> for having raised the nuclear specter that could materialize in the
> form of a 'mushroom cloud.' National Security Advisor Condoleezza
> Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney took some of their talk-show
> lines on the nuclear danger from the Times article of Sept. 8, 2002
> by Judith Miller and Michael Gordon, 'US Says Hussein Intensifies
> Quest for A-Bomb Parts.' "
>SOURCE: Editor & Publisher, February 18, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077080401
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077080401
>
>15. ONE PART KERRY, ONE PART FONDA
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1150509,00.html
> "A new dirty tricks campaign to embarrass the Democratic
> frontrunner, John Kerry, backfired ignominiously yesterday when it
> emerged that a widely circulated photograph of a protest against
> the Vietnam war was a crude forgery," reports Suzanne Goldenberg.
> "The photograph, falsely credited to Associated Press, combined two
> separate images to make it appear as if Mr Kerry shared a stage at
> an anti-war rally in the early 1970s with the actress, Jane Fonda."
> The fabricated photos are not the only recent attempt to smear
> Kerry. Republican gossip-monger Matt Drudge recently concocted a
> story which claimed that Kerry had an affair with a 27-year-old
> woman. Our Disinfopedia has a page devoted to documenting and
> debunking new smears as they emerge.
>SOURCE: Guardian (UK), February 18, 2004
>More web links related to this story are available at:
> http://www.prwatch.org/spin/February_2004.html#1077080400
>To discuss this story in the PR Watch Forum, visit:
> http://www.prwatch.org/forum/discuss.php?id=1077080400
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>The Weekly Spin is compiled by staff and volunteers at PR Watch.
>To subscribe or unsubcribe, visit:
>http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
>
>Daily updates and news from past weeks can be found at the
>Spin of the Day" section of the PR Watch website:
>http://www.prwatch.org/spin/index.html
>
>Archives of our quarterly publication, PR Watch, are at:
>http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues
>
>PR Watch, Spin of the Day and the Weekly Spin are projects
>of the Center for Media & Democracy, a nonprofit organization
>that offers investigative reporting on the public relations
>industry. We help the public recognize manipulative and
>misleading PR practices by exposing the activities of
>secretive, little-known propaganda-for-hire firms that
>work to control political debates and public opinion.
>Please send any questions or suggestions about our
>publications to:
>(editor /at/ prwatch.org)
>
>Contributions to the Center for Media & Democracy
>are tax-deductible. Send checks to:
> CMD
> 520 University Ave. #310
> Madison, WI 53703
>
>To donate now online, visit:
>https://www.egrants.org/donate/index.cfm?ID=2344-0|1118-0
>_______________________________________________
>Weekly-Spin mailing list
>(Weekly-Spin /at/ prwatch.org)
>http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/weekly-spin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Carpentier Nico (Phd)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Katholieke Universiteit Brussel - Catholic University of Brussels
Vrijheidslaan 17 - B-1081 Brussel - Belgium
T: ++ 32 (0)2-412.42.78
F: ++ 32 (0)2/412.42.00
Office: 4/0/18
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Vrije Universiteit Brussel - Free University of Brussels
Centre for Media Sociology (CeMeSO)
Pleinlaan 2 - B-1050 Brussels - Belgium
T: ++ 32 (0)2-629.18.30
F: ++ 32 (0)2-629.28.61
Office: C0.05
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail: (Nico.Carpentier /at/ kubrussel.ac.be)
Web: http://homepages.vub.ac.be/~ncarpent/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
ECCR-Mailing list
---
To unsubscribe, send an email message to (majordomo /at/ listserv.vub.ac.be)
with in the body of the message (NOT in the subject): unsubscribe eccr
---
ECCR - European Consortium for Communications Research
Secretariat: P.O. Box 106, B-1210 Brussels 21, Belgium
Tel.: +32-2-412 42 78/47
Fax.: +32-2-412 42 00
Email: (freenet002 /at/ pi.be) or (Rico.Lie /at/ pi.be)
URL: http://www.eccr.info
----------------
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
